340.30973  (3,  {» 

:162a 

Aiding  the  Entente 

===  =  =  as  -'■■■■ — - ■■= 

an  American  Policy 


By 

GEORGE  F.  CANFIELD 

PROFESSOR  OF  LAW 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


19  16 


(Reprinted  from  THE  NEW  YORK  TIMES,  January  1 3th,  1916) 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/aidingententeasaOOcanf 


Aiding  the  Entente  as  an  American  Policy 


An  Official  Declaration  Is  Advocated  as  Our  Best  Course — 
Losses  Due  to  the  Blockade  to  be  Paid 
by  a  Tax  Upon  Ourselves 


To  the  Editor  of  The  New  York  Times: 

The  present  dominant  sentiments  of  the  American  people, 
if  I  read  the  signs  of  the  times  aright,  are  for  peace,  prepared¬ 
ness,  and  the  destruction  of  German  militarism.  These  three 
objects  are  closely  related  and  are,  in  fact,  mutually  interde¬ 
pendent.  The  destruction  of  German  militarism  would  quickly 
prepare  the  way  for  a  durable  peace.  Peace  re-established 
without  the  destruction  of  German  militarism  would  be  un¬ 
stable  and,  so  far  as  we  can  now  see,  in  its  ultimate  effect  upon 
the  human  race  would  be  worse  than  the  continuance  of  the 
war.  And  until  militarism  is  destroyed — until  the  world  is 
rid  of  aggressive  nations  coveting  the  territory  or  wealth  of 
other  nations — preparedness  is  ,a  vital  and  immediate  need 
of  all  nations  possessing  the  coveted  territory  or  wealth. 

The  American  people  are  by  tradition  unalterably  opposed 
to  militarism — that  is,  to  the  system  under  which  there  is  a 
subordination  of  the  civil  to  the  military  regime  and  of  the 
civil  power  to  the  military  power  of  the  State.  History  is  a 
witness  to  the  abominable  deeds  of  oppression  and  cruelty 
committed  in  its  name.  It  is  incompatible  with  American 
ideals,  which,  as  our  Secretary  of  State  finely  expressed  it 
before  the  Pan  American  Congress,  do  not  lie  in  the  path  of 
conquest,  but  in  the  paths  of  peace  and  justice.  And  in  par¬ 
ticular  militarism  is  incompatible  with  those  principles  of 
liberty  and  individualism  which  are  the  cherished  heritage  of 
the  English-speaking  world. 

While  for  these  reasons  we  are  opposed  to  militarism  in 
general,  with  still  greater  reason  do  we  dread  and  abhor  Ger¬ 
man  militarism,  because  it  is  so  efficient,  so  ruthless,  and  so 
unrestrained  by  any  principle  of  law,  morality,  or  human¬ 
ity.  The  invasion  of  Belgium,  the  use  of  asphyxiating  gas, 


the  Zeppelin  raids,  the  Lusitania,  Arabic,  Ancona,  and  other 
horrors  of  submarine  warfare,  the  shooting  of  Miss  Cavell, 
the  plotting  against  life  and  property,  and  the  deeds 
of  violence  in  this  neutral  country  are  each  and  all 
lurid  revelations  of  the  particular  brand  of  militarism  which 
is  made  in  Germany.  Captain  von  Papen,  upon  his  being 
informed  that  President  'Wilson  had  demanded  his  recall,  is 
reported  to  have  said:  “I  have  no  regrets.  I  have  simply 
done  my  duty  as  a  soldier  and  have  obeyed  instructions.”  (It 
is  to  be  noted  that  this  is  a  confession  that  whatever  he  was 
responsible  for  was  done  under  the  orders  of  his  superior 
officers.)  Similarly,  Captain  Bpy-Ed,  with  equal  nonchalance, 
is  reported  to  have  expressed  himself  as  follows:  “I  have 
simply  done  my  duty  as  a  naval  officer,  and  the  majority  of 
criticisms  against  me  in  the  American  press  have  been  un¬ 
justified  and  unfair.  The  American  newspaper  men  have  not 
taken  into  consideration  the  strain  under  which  I  have  labored 
and  the  fact  that  none  of  my  activities  were  individual  in 
character,  but  that  I  have  been  simply  an  officer  carrying  out 
orders  to  the  best  of  my  ability  under  all  circumstances.”  (An¬ 
other  naive  confession.) 

This  is  the  essence  of  German  militarism — obedience  im¬ 
plicit  and  unquestioning.  Whatever  the  great  military 
oligarchy  orders  you  to  do,  whether  it  is  to  destroy  priceless 
works  of  art,  to  kill  innocent  women  and  children,  or  to  shoot 
down  a  ministering  angel  of  mercy,  you  do  it  without  hesita¬ 
tion,  and  after  it  is  done  you  contemplate  your  deeds  with 
complacent  satisfaction,  feeling  that  you  have  simply  acted  as 
a  blind  instrument  of  ruthless  military  force  and  have  done 
nothing  in  your  individual  capacity  as  a  moral  being.  Against 
such  militarism  the  whole  world,  including  all  loyal  German- 
Americans  who  are  in  sympathy  with  our  institutions,  should 
be  inflexibly  arrayed,  and  until  such  militarism  is  destroyed 
we  cannot  escape  the  obligations  and  burdens  of  preparedness, 
naval  and  military. 

The  advocates  of  preparedness  have  sometimes  been  ac¬ 
cused  of  selfish  purposes.  This  is  the  usual  argumentum  ad 
hominem  which  can  always  be  used  against  either  party  to  a 
controversy.  Undoubtedly  selfish  motives  enter  to  some  ex¬ 
tent  into  every  national  policy,  but  nothing  can  be  clearer  than 
that  our  military  and  naval  officers  and  our  manufacturers  of 
munitions  constitute  negligible  factors  in  the  affairs  of  this 
nation,  and  that  the  plan  of  preparedness  which  will  be 
finally  adopted  will  be  based  on  the  broad  and  fundamental 
national  needs  and  will  be  determined  in  accordance  with  the 
judgment  of  patriotic  Americans,  uninfluenced  by  any  selfish 
consideration  other  than  a  commendable  selfish  regard  for 
the  welfare  of  the  country.  And  there  need  be  no  fear  that 


America,  in  pursuing  a  sound  policy  of  preparedness,  will 
be  diverted  from  her  path  of  peace  or  abandon  any  of  her 
old  ideals. 

There  can  also  be  no  doubt  that  the  overwhelming  senti¬ 
ment  and  influence  of  this  nation  will  always  be  for  peace, 
for  its  maintenance  so  long  as  that  is  possible,  and  for  the 
speediest  re-establishment  of  it  after  it  has  been  broken. 
But  in  our  desire  for  peace,  we  must  not  lose  sight  of  the  fact 
that  a  peace  which  is  not  based  on  justice  and  the  right  adjust¬ 
ment  of  international  relations  may  be  a  curse  instead  of  a 
blessing.  In  the  present  crisis,  therefore,  we  must  use  such 
influence  as  we  may  have  to  promote  the  re-establishment  of 
such  a  peace  as  will  not  involve  the  menace  of  future  wars. 
And  to  this  end  we  must  insist,  so  far  as  we  may  have  any 
voice  in  the  matter,  that  there  shall  be  no  peace  which  will 
add  to  the  prestige  and  menace  of  German  militarism. 

If  the  foregoing  propositions  are  sound,  the  path  of  our 
nation’s  duty  is  clearly  marked  out  for  us.  We  should,  in 
the  first  place,  promptly  modify  our  present  official  attitude  of 
neutrality  in  thought  and  action. 

At  the  outbreak  of  the  war  President  Wilson  not  only 
issued  the  usual  proclamation  of  neutrality,  but,  out  of  regard 
for  the  large  Teutonic  element  in  our  population,  he  issued 
a  special  appeal  to  the  country,  enjoining  neutrality  in  thought 
and  action.  This  was  an  attempt  to  impose  upon  us  what 
probably  under  any  circumstances  would  have  proved  to  be 
an  impossible  task,  but  it  was  made  all  the  more  difficult  by 
the  attitude  of  the  German  Government,  which,  not  being 
satisfied  with  the  neutrality  of  this  country,  at  once  set  to 
work  to  win  our  sympathy  and  support.  At  first  its  efforts 
were  limited  to  the  methods  of  a  fairly  legitimate  educational 
campaign.  The  country  was  flooded  with  literature  and  public 
meetings  were  addressed  by  speakers  presenting  the  German 
point  of  view.  But  in  spite  Of  the  most  strenuous  efforts  of 
this  sort  the  American  people,  after  having  patiently  weighed 
the  facts  and  arguments,  remained  of  the  same  opinion  still, 
and  finally  the  whole  campaign  broke  down  ingloriously  at 
the  time  of  the  torpedoing  of  the  Lusitania,  when  Dr.  Dem- 
burg  so  gravely  misinterpreted  the  temper  of  the  American 
public. 

This  campaign  of  education,  having  failed  of  its  object, 
was  followed  by  the  nefarious  and  sinister  plottings  and  con¬ 
spiracies,  apparently  financed  by  the  German  Government, 
against  the  lives  and  property  of  American  citizens,  against 
the  legitimate  industries  of  the  country,  and  against  the  flota¬ 
tion  of  the  Anglo-French  loan.  These  conspiracies  have  like¬ 
wise  miserably  failed,  and  they  have  not  only  failed,  but  they 
have  had  an  effect  quite  contrary  to  the  intention  of  those  who 


sought  to  carry  them  into  execution,  the  effect,  namely,  of 
strengthening  and  consolidating  the  sentiment  of  the  American 
people  in  favor  of  the  Allies  and  of  absolving  us  from  all 
further  obligation  to  attempt  to  maintain  an  attitude  of  neu¬ 
trality.  Let  us  be  frank  and  honest.  There  is  no  use  of 
further  pretending  that  the  country  is  neutral.  It  is  no  longer 
neutral,  and  the  official  attitude  of  our  Government  should 
be  brought  into  harmony  with  the  real  attitude  of  the  country 
and  should  give  expression  to  our  sympathy  with  the  cause  of 
the  Allies. 

As  a  corollary  to  this  official  declaration  of  our  sympathy 
with  the  Allies  we  should  not  interfere  with  the  British 
blockade  of  Germany,  even  if  it  should  conflict  with  the  rights 
of  some  of  our  citizens.  It  would  be  utterly  incongruous  and 
would  shock  the  conscience  of  the  country  if  by  pursuing  our 
protests  against  the  British  Orders  in  Council  we  should 
hamper  the  operations  of  the  Allies,  who  are  really  fighting  our 
battles  and  contending  for  principles  which  we  hold  most  dear. 
And  the  country  should  lose  no  time  in  letting  Congress  and 
the  Administration  know  what  its  sentiments  are  on  this  sub¬ 
ject.  Assuming  for  the  purpose  of  argument  that  the  blockade 
cannot  be  made  completely  effective  without  violating  the 
rights  of  our  citizens,  it  may  be  urged  that  these  rights  should 
not  be  abandoned  or  sacrificed  even  for  our  general  welfare. 
There  is  merit  in  this  contention.  It  is  one  of  the  cardinal 
principles  of  our  Constitutions  that  private  property  shall  not 
be  taken  even  for  public  use  without  compensation.  But 
this  difficulty  may  be  easily  overcome.  Our  Government  can 
establish  a  claims  commission  to  determine,  after  the  close  of 
the  war,  upon  the  basis  of  legal  evidence,  the  amount  of  injury 
suffered  by  out  citizens  as  a  result  of  the  blockade.  This  com¬ 
mission  could  be  given  jurisdiction  to  pass  upon  the  whole 
question  both  of  law  and  of  fact.  And  if  it  should  be  determ¬ 
ined  that  the  rights  of  our  citizens  had  been  violated  and  that 
they  were  entitled  to  an  award  of  damages,  we  should  not 
ask  England  to  pay  those  damages,  but  we  should  assume  the 
payment  of  them  ourselves.  We  ought  to  be  willing  to  make 
at  least  this  small  contribution  to  the  cause  of  liberty  and  to 
the  right  settlement  of  the  tremendous  issues  involved  in 
the  present  war.  If  exact  justice  could  be  done  it  might  be 
contended  that  the  award  of  damages  to  those  who  had 
suffered  from  the  blockade  should  be  paid  out  of  funds  raised 
by  a  special  tax  upon  those  who  have  benefited  by  the  im¬ 
mense  expansion  of  our  foreign  trade,  for  which  this  country 
is  indebted  to  the  invincible  British  Navy.  But  the  benefits 
of  this  enlarged  foreign  trade  have  been  so  widely  diffused 
among  all  classes  of  our  citizens,  including  not  merely  manu¬ 
facturers  of  munitions,  of  automobiles,  and  of  many  kinds 
of  steel  and  leather  goods,  but  also  the  oil  men,  the  miners, 


and  the  farmers  of  the  West,  that  practical  justice  will  be  done 
by  levying  a  tax  upon  the  whole  country. 

The  advantages  of  the  suggested  policy  may  be  briefly 
stated  as  follows: 

We  should  contribute  very  directly  and  efficiently  to  the 
speedy  re-establishment  of  peace.  There  is  danger  that,  if 
Germany  is  any  longer  permitted  to  indulge  in  the  illusion 
that  she  can  ever  win  the  sympathy  or  support  of  this  country 
before  she  renounces  her  militarism  and  her  dreams  of  world 
domination,  she  will  be  induced  to  continue  the  struggle  be¬ 
yond  the  time  when  any  useful  purpose  can  be  served  and 
possibly  to  the  irreparable  impairment  of  her  econmic  re¬ 
sources.  She  is  fairly  entitled  to  know  officially  what  the 
attitude  of  this  country  is,  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that, 
when  every  doubt  as  to  our  attitude  is  removed,  she  will 
become  accessible  to  reasonable  proposals  of  peace. 

We  should  also  retain  and  strengthen  the  friendship  of 
the  Allies  for  this  country.  We  have  already  lost  for  the  time 
being  the  good-will  of  the  Teutonic  allies,  and  simple  prudence 
dictates  that  we  should  not  incur  any  more  enmities.  And 
until  we  have  put  our  military  and  naval  house  in  order,  the 
friendship  and  support  of  the  Allies  might  be  of  the  greatest 
advantage  to  us.  Indeed,  with  the  active  support  of  France 
and  England,  and  especially  with  such  an  alliance  between  the 
three  great  liberty-loving  nations  of  the  world,  as  President 
Eliot  has  advocated,  the  need  of  a  large  army,  or  even  a  large 
navy,  would  be  greatly  diminished.  The  suggested  policy 
therefore  would  contribute  in  a  very  direct  manner  to  the 
solution  of  our  difficult  problem  of  preparedness  and  deserves 
the  support  of  pacifists  as  well  as  of  the  advocates  of  pre¬ 
paredness. 

Finally,  by  modifying  our  present  neutrality  and  throwing 
the  full  weight  of  our  moral  influence,  and,  if  need  be,  of  our 
material  resources  into  the  scales  on  the  side  of  the  Allies,  we 
shall  gain  the  right  to  be  heard  as  to  the  terms  of  peace.  We 
are  vitally  interested  in  these  terms  of  peace.  We  are  vitally 
interested  in  the  right  settlement  of  the  tremendous  issues 
involved  in  this  great  war,  and  we  are  vitally  interested  that 
these  issues  shall  be  so  settled  as  to  assure  an  enduring  peace 
and  to  relieve  ourselves  as  well  as  the  rest  of  the  world  from 
the  burden  and  waste  of  military  preparedness.  It  may  also 
be  important  that  we  should  have  a  voice  in  the  councils  of 
peace  in  order  to  mitigate  the  exactions  of  the  conquerors. 
The  sentiment  and  influence  of  this  country  will  always  be 
against  harsh  terms  and  against  the  “crushing”  or  crippling 
of  any  nation. 

The  modification  of  our  neutrality  to  the  extent  above 
indicated  does  not  mean  the  widening  of  the  area  of  warfare 


or  that  we  shall  become  involved  in  it  and  in  the  frightful 
sacrifices  of  human  life  which  modern  warfare  entails.  Our 
official  expressions  of  sympathy  with  Greece  in  her  struggle 
for  independence  against  Turkey  did  not  involve  us  in  war. 
On  the  contrary,  the  policy  herein  suggested  means  in  all 
human  probability  the  speedier  return  of  peace  and  on  a  basis 
just  and  fair  to  all  parties.  And  it  is  earnestly  submitted  that 
a  policy  may  be  confidently  commended  as  one  possessing 
intrinsic  merit,  which  by  a  single  stroke  will  contribute  simul¬ 
taneously  to  the  three  great  objects  of  our  desires — peace, 
preparedness,  and  the  destruction  of  German  militarism. 

—GEORGE  F.  CANFIELD. 


CRITERION  PRESS,  59  PEARL  STREET,  N.  Y. 


